7 ?•  King^ 

When  ‘V^y  kVTjom 

Cincmnat"i  Fb< 


& 


Hatt 


nc/ed  f* 

% 


Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 


tP 


University  of  Illinois  Library 


Irfi 


b I95S 


m 15  1956 


OCT  13 

AUG  5 


1099 

1 0 1999 


When,  and  by  Whom,  was  Cincinnati  Founded? 


i ?i'  AN"  ADDRESS  to  the  Pioneer  Association  of  Cin- 
cinnati, April  7th,  1882.  By  Rufus  King. 


4 

O 

f-J 


i 

I 


For  the  brief  contribution,  which  I shall  offer  you 
to-day,  I have  selected  a subject  not  only  without  novelty, 
but  which,  indeed,  may  long  since  have  become  a settled 
point  with  many  of  you.  Nevertheless,  I trust  it  may  he 
deemed  appropriate  to  this  interesting  occasion,  and,  possi- 
bly, productive  of  some  practical  result. 

When  and  by  whom  was  Cincinnati  founded,  is  the 
subject  proposed. 

This  Association,  it  is  understood,  recognizes  the  28tli 
of  December,  1788,  as  the  date  of  the  first  settlement  of 
the  town  : and  why,  you  may  ask,  is  there  any  further 
question  about  it  ? 

In  reply,  it  is  to  be  said  that  the  Association  is  not  un- 
derstood ever  to  have  formally  considered  or  decided  the 
question,  even  for  themselves,  but  have  accepted  this  date 
rather  in  deference  to  the  supposed  authority  of  William 
McMillan,  one  of  the  first  settlers  of  the  town,  and  a man 
of  intelligence  and  high  standing.  On  the  other  hand  we 
have  Judge  Burnet’s  statement  that  the  landing  of  the 
first  settlers,  here,  was  on  the  24th  of  December,  1788  : and 
Doctor  Drake  and  Governor  Chase,  highly  respectable  au- 
thorities, who  must  be  presumed  to  have  informed  them- 
selves whereof  they  spoke,  both  fixed  the  date  on  December 
26th  in  that  year  : which  day,  fifty  years  ago,  was  recog- 
nized and  publicly  celebrated  here  as  the  anniversary. — But 
Col.  Patterson  and  Col.  Israel  Ludlow,  the  two  leaders 
of  the  party,  distinctly  stated,  as  we  shall  see,  that  they 
landed  here  in  January  1789. 

Writers,  in  later  years,  have  taken  sides  for  each  and 
all  of  these  dates.  The  Bev.  James  H.  Perkins,  in  his 


“Western  Annals,” — a work  by  all  odds  more  full,  more 
accurate,  and  more  generaUy  satisfactory  than  any  other 
one  book  on  the  early  history  of  the  West — after  compar- 
ing these  conflicting  statements,  sums  it  up  as  a curious 
fact  that  the  date  of  the  settlement  of  Cincinnati  is  un- 
known, even  though  we  have  the  testimony  of  the  very 
men  who  made  it. — Western  Annals , 308. 

But  it  will  not  do  to  give  it  up.  In  the  grand  round 
of  Centennials  which  is  passing  over  the  country,  Cincin- 
nati also  must  have  her  day.  It  will  not  be  many  years 
before  our  turn  will  come  ; and  it  becomes  our  citizens  to 
adopt  timely  measures  for  ascertaining  and  establishing 
our  city’s  birthday. 

In  such  an  investigation  it  is  not  assuming  too  much 
to  believe  that  there  is  no  portion  of  the  community  who 
may  more  properly  lead  the  way,  or  to  whom  the  others 
will  more  willingly  defer  the  lead,  than  this  Association. 

What  I would,  therefore,  beg  leave  to  propose  is  that 
this  Association  shall  undertake  this  office;  and  that,  after 
gathering  all  the  light  which  their  means  and  opportunities 
can  bring  to  bear  upon  it,  they  shall  formally  announce 
their  conclusion,  as  to  the  day  we  should  celebrate,  for  the 
guidance  or  benefit  of  our  fellow-citizens,  when  they  come 
to  determine  the  proper  time. 

To  this  practical  object  my  remarks  to-day  will  be  di- 
rected, and  I shall  simply  present  to  you  a sketch  of  some 
facts  and  dates  which  may  serve  as  a beginning  of  the  in- 
quiry, hoping  to  show  where  the  difficulty  lies  in  deter- 
mining it : and  if  it  really  be  insuperable,  then  to  point 
out  a solution  which  may,  perhaps,  answer  the  purpose  in 
view  of  fixing  our  Centennial. 

It  seems,  at  this  day,  a wonder,  considering  the  fertili- ' 
ty  and  beauty  of  the  Miami  Valley,  and  the  attractions 
which  this  particular  spot  presented  to  the  eyes  of  the  har- 
dy pioneers,  as  they  floated  past  on  the  gentle  current  of  the 
Ohio,  that  the  settlement  here  was  not  made  sooner  than  it 
happened;  and  especially  that  the  Marietta  Colony,  whose 
anniversary  we  keep  to-day,  should  have  given  the  prefer- 
ence to  the  hilly  and  broken  region  which  they  chose. 


[ 3 ] 

There  is  a tradition  that  they  consulted  Zane,  who  was  one 
of  the  foremost  and  most  sagacious  of  the  land  operators 
North-west  of  the  Ohio,  and  that  he  advised  them  to  try 
the  Miami  country.  But,  according  to  the  story,  they  were 
under  a shrewd  impression  that  as  his  interests  were  chiefly 
on  the  upper  Ohio,  he  wanted  a barrier  between  himself 
and  the  Indians,  and  they  concluded  to  plant  themselves  on 
the  Muskingum. 

The  truth  is  that  immediately  after  the  cession  of  the 
North-west  Territory  to  the  United  States  by  the  treaty  of 
peace  with  Great  Britain,  a fierce  and  bloody  conflict,  large- 
ly instigated  by  British  emissaries  and  agents,  arose  between 
the  Indian  tribes  in  that  Territory  and  the  settlers  of  Ken- 
tucky. In  this  war  the  Miami  Valley,  and  particularly  the 
lower  part,  along  the  Ohio,  became  exceedingly  dangerous 
ground,  and  indeed  was  a sealed  book,  little  known  to  the 
whites.  The  constant  raids  and  incursions  by  the  Indians 
across  the  Ohio,  at  this  point,  and  the  retaliatory  expedi- 
tions by  which  the  Kentuckians,  under  bold  leaders  like 
George  Rogers  Clarke,  struck  back  at  their  savage  foe,  had 
given  to  this  vicinity  the  significant  appellation  of  the 
44  Miami  Slaughter  House.” 

It  might  be  interesting,  but  our  time  will  not  now  admit 
of  it,  to  go  back  to  various  early  glimpses  of  these  rich  and 
luxuriant  landscapes,  which  we  get  from  the  narrative  of 
Christopher  Gist,  the  expert  woodsman,  who  in  March,  1751, 
traveled  down  the  Little  Miami,  prospecting  for  choice 
lands  for  his  employers,  the  Ohio  Company,  and  who 
speaks  of  the  fertile  meadows  on  its  banks,  where  he  saw 
herds  of  buffalo  feeding  in  the  white  clover,  wild  rye  and 
blue  grass;  or  the  grander  pageant  of  three  hundred  French 
and  Indians,  under  the  command  of  DeCeloron,  who  were 
sent  by  the  Governor  of  Canada,  in  1749,  across  Lake  Erie 
and  Lake  Chautauqua  and  down  the  waters  of  the  Alleghe- 
ny and  the  Ohio  rivers,  to  assert  the  dominion  and  posses- 
sion of  this  country  for  the  French  Government;  burying 
at  the  mouth  of  the  chief  tributaries  of  the  Ohio,  as  they 
passed  along,  leaden  plates  inscribed  with  the  purpose  of 
their  mission,  and  which  turned  its  fleet  of  batteaux’s  up 

f n s'*  r m 

v 


the  Great  Miami  (marked  on  their  map  as  the  river 
LaRoche)  and  in  September,  1749  navigated  that  stream 
up  to  Loramie,  thence  crossing  the  portage  to  the  Maumee 
and  returning  to  Canada;  or  what  must  have  been  the  far 
more  imposing  display,  in  1780,  of  sixty-three  boats  carry- 
ing 1,000  men  with  their  families  down  the  Ohio  to  the  falls, 
so  graphically  described  by  General  Lytle,  then  a youth, 
and  one  of  the  adventurers,  and  in  which  an  exciting  epi- 
sode occurred  by  an  encounter  with  the  Indians  on  the  site 
of  Cincinnati. 

These  are  digressions  which  must  be  passed  over.  But 
finally  there  came  an  incident  which  broke  the  spell  resting 
upon  the  Miamis,  and  which  I wish  I could  notice  more 
fully,  not  only  for  its  romance,  but  being  so  closely  con- 
nected with  our  subject;  for  upon  it  the  foundation  of 
Cincinnati  followed  and  depended. 

Observe,  that  as  late  as  the  year  1786,  this  valley  con- 
tinued to  be  not  only  untenanted  by  the  emigrant,  but 
otherwise  than  as  the  great  war-path  was  comparatively 
unknown. 

John  Cleves  Symmes,  of  New  Jersey,  as  is  well  known, 
applied  to  Congress,  at  New  York,  on  the  29th  of  August, 
1787,  for  the  Miami  Purchase,  encouraged,  his  petition 
stated,  by  their  action  in  the  previous  month  in  favor  of 
the  Marietta  Colony  of  Messrs.  Sargent,  Cutler  and  Com- 
pany. 

But  how  or  wThy  Judge  Symmes  became  inspired  with 
this  enterprise  is  not  so  generally  known.  And  the  incident 
to  which  I allude  was  the  bold  exploit  of  Major  Benjamin 
Stites,  also  a hardy  son  of  New  Jersey,  so  well  described 
by  your  respected  President,  Daniel  Gano,  in  his  address 
at  your  annual  meeting  in  April,  1871 — an  exploit  which 
entitles  him  to  be  distinguished  as  the  man  who  opened 
the  way  to  the  Miami  Purchase.  I need  only  remind  you 
that,  as  a volunteer,  merely,  he  joined  a party  of  Ken- 
tuckians in  the  pursuit  of  some  Indian  horse-thieves  across 
the  Ohio  and  up  the  Little  Miami  river,  but  being  unsuc- 
cessful they  crossed  over  and  returned  by  way  of  the  Great 
Miami.  Delighted  with  his  view  of  the  land,  Major  Stites 


returned  immediately  to  .New  Jersey  and  made  known  his 
discovery  to  Judge  Symmes,  a leading  citizen  of  that  state, 
but  not,  as  is  commonly  supposed,  a member  of  Congress 
at  that  time,  his  term  of  office  having  expired  in  the  pre- 
vious year.  He  saw  at  once  the  value  and  importance  of 
the  information,  but  before  entering  into  the  project,  he 
descended  the  Ohio  river  as  far  as  the  Falls,  stopping  and 
carefully  examining  the  northern  shore  between  the  Miamis. 
Thoroughly  satisfied  that  Stites  had  not  overdrawn  the  pic- 
ture, Judge  Symmes,  on  his  return,  applied  in  behalf  of 
himself  and  his  associates  for  the  purchase  of  the  entire 
body  of  land  on  the  Ohio  river,  between  the  Great  and  Lit- 
tle Miami  rivers. 

Belying  that  this  grant  would  be  made,  and  without 
awaiting  the  answer,  he  entered  into  a contract  with  Stites 
on  the  9th  of  November,  1787,  to  sell  him  ten  thousand 
acres  on  the  Ohio  and  Little  Miami  rivers;  and  in  January, 
1788,  contracted  with  Matthias  Denman,  of  Essex  county, 
New  Jersey,  to  sell  him  the  entire  section  of  land  situated 
opposite  the  mouth  of  the  Licking  river,  reserving  for  him- 
self a large  tract  at  the  mouth  of  the  Great  Miami.  Each 
of  them  had  the  same  object  in  view  in  putting  themselves 
at  the  mouth  of  these  rivers,  and  three  rival  towns  were  at 
once  projected  at  these  points. 

But  the  Treasury  Board,  which  had  charge  of  sales  of 
the  public  lands,  would  not  grant  the  entire  front  on  the 
Ohio  between  the  Miamis,  their  policy  being  to  extend  the 
grants  more  into  the  interior;  and  after  delaying  the  con- 
tract until  the  15th  of  May,  1788,  they  then  limited  its 
width  to  twenty  miles  only,  on  the  Ohio,  to  be  measured 
by  its  meanders,  from  the  mouth  of  the  Great  Miami.  This 
was  a disappointment,  which  for  years  made  much  difficulty 
and  loss  to  Judge  Symmes,  though  the  entire  distance  was 
finally  conceded  by  the  Government. 

Thus  we  have  the  inception  and  the  dates,  introducing 
the  several  schemes  which  were  now  coming  forward  to  bid 
for  the  favor  of  posterity ; and  during  the  summer  of  1788, 
Symmes  and  Stites  and  Denman  were  all  busy  with  organ- 
izing and  preparations  for  the  start. 


Symmes  having  been  appointed  one  of  the  judges  in 
the  Territorial  Government  established  by  Congress,  was  de- 
layed, but  8tit.es  and  Denman  were  at  Limestone,  now  known 
as  Maysville,  in  August;  the  former,  with  his  strong  party 
of  friends  and  followers, vigorously  making  everything  ready 
for  building  and  equipping  his  settlement  immediately  on 
reaching  the  ground.  Thus  he  was  foremost,  and  on  the 
18th  of  November,  1788,  despite  the  alarm  of  Indian  oppo- 
sition, which  had  been  raised  against  him,  he  landed  them 
safely  at  Columbia,  and  in  a few  days  had  them  housed  for 
the  winter  and  fortified  against  the  enemy. 

Judge  Symmes,  with  his  large  party,  had  reached  Lime- 
stone early  in  September.  Denman,  with  whom  our  fortunes 
were  now  to  be  more  particularly  involved,  had  brought 
no  party  with  him,  but  by  skillful  generalship  he  executed 
a flank  movement,  which  brought  him  new  elements  of 
strength,  and,  no  doubt,  much  of  his  subsequent  success. 

Passing  over  to  Lexington,  Kentucky,  he  there  united 
himself  in  partnership  with  two  citizens  of  that  pflace : 
Colonel  Kobert  Patterson,  a native  of  Bedford  county,  Penn- 
sylvania, who  about  the  year  1780  founded  the  City  of  Lex- 
ington, a gentleman  of  high  character,  standing,  and  in- 
fluence among  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  distinguished 
as  a gallant  soldier;  and  John  Filson,  a native  of  Chester 
county,  Pennsylvania,  who  had  begun  life  as  a schoolmaster, 
but  had  early  emigrated  to  Kentucky.  Besides  being  a 
surveyor  and  considerable  dealer  in  lands,  he  was  the  author 
of  the  first  history  of  the  adventures  of  Daniel  Boone  and 
of  the  settlement  of  Kentucky,  published  in  1784.  A for- 
mal contract  by  these  three  associates,  headed  u with  refer- 
ence to  Losantiville,”  was  executed  at  Lexington,  on  the 
25th  of  August,  1788,  by  which  Denman,  in  consideration 
of  twenty  pounds,  Virginia  currency,  to  be  paid  to  him  by 
Patterson  and  Filson,  sold  to  them  two-thirds  of  his  pur- 
chase under  Symmes;  and  it  was  solemnly  stipulated  that 
“every  institution,  determination,  and  regulation  respect- 
ing the  laying-off  a town,  and  establishing  a ferry  upon  the 
premises,  should  be  the  result  and  united  advice  and  concert 
of  the  parties.” 


Thus  was  Cincinnati  incubated,  and  it  was  by  the  name 
and  style  of  Losantiville,  There  is  no  doubt  of  this  fact, 
though  stoutly  disputed  by  some  of  our  distinguished  an- 
tiquarians. The  paper  proves  it. 

Next  appeared  an  advertisement  in  the  Kentucky  Ga- 
zette, at  Lexington,  August  30th,  1788,  signed  by  the  three 
proprietors,  announcing  that  they  have  “ determined  to  lay 
off  a town  ” opposite  the  mouth  of  Licking  river,  and  that 
an  inlot  of  half  an  acre  and  an  outlot  of  four  acres  will  be 
given  to  each  of  the  first  thirty  settlers  who  become  resi- 
dents before  the  1st  day  of  April  following.  They  also 
announce  that  on  September  15th  a large  company  was  to 
assemble  at  Lexington,  and  proceed  to  mark  out  a road  to 
the  mouth  of  Licking,  provided  Judge  Symmes  arrived,  he 
being  expected  daily. 

By  a subsequent  advertisement  in  the  Kentucky  Ga- 
zette, September  13th,  Col.  Patterson  announced,  that  the 
day  of  departure  was  changed  to  the  18th,  so  as  to  meet 
Judge  Symmes  at  the  mouth  of  Licking,  on  Monday,  the 
22d,  “agreeable  to  his  appointment,  and  the  business  will 
then  go  on  as  proposed.”  Please  observe  the  words  for 
they  were  exactly  followed  up  and  fulfilled. 

Col.  Patterson  and  Filson  rode  over  at  the  head  of  an 
armed  company  of  Kentuckians.  Judge  Symmes,  Denman 
and  Israel  Ludlow,  with  their  company,  came  down  the 
Ohio  river  from  Limestone. 

On  Monday,  the  22d  day  of  September,  in  the  year 
1788,  these  different  interests  assembled  on  the  ground  so 
designated,  pursuant  to  the  covenant  and  determination  so 
drawn  up  and  signed,  and  the  public  announcement  and 
invitation  so  advertised. 

Then  and  there,  I submit,  was  the  foundation  of  Cin- 
cinnati ; solemnized  by  this  demonstration,  never  relin- 
quished, but  executed  and  carried  out,  even  in  the  name  of 
the  town,  as  we  shall  find,  in  conformity  with  the  original 
design  concluded  at  Lexington,  on  the  25th  of  August. 

Here,  on  his  part,  that  day  stood  Symmes,  recognized 
as  the  representative  of  the  Government  title,  ready  to 
make  the  project  good : and  there  with  him  was  Israel 


Ludlow,  his  head  surveyor  and  adviser  in  the  laying  out  of 
the  Miami  Purchase.  There,  on  the  other  part,  were  Den- 
man, Patterson  and  Filson,  the  recognized  proprietors  by 
purchase  from  Symmes,  of  the  town  site  : Filson  holding  the 
projected  plat  in  his  hand.  And  there,  also,  were  the  ex- 
pectants of  the  half  acre  in-lots  and  four  acre  out-lots  prom- 
ised to  the  brave  thirty  who,  before  the  1st  day  of  April  fol- 
owing  were  to  venture  in  as  residents;  saying  nothing  of 
the  other  attendants  who  on  such  occasions  always  take  an 
interest  on  behalf  of  the  public.  Surely  this  was  worthy 
enough  to  he  dignified  as  the  foundation  of  the  town. 

But  before  the  actual  settlement  could  be  formed  two 
things  had  to  be  ascertained : first,  where  was  the  twenty 
mile  point  above  the  mouth  of  the  Great  Miami;  second,  and 
still  more  important,  where  were  the  lines  of  the  section  up- 
on which  the  town  plat  was  to  be  laid  off.  In  other  words, 
while  it  was  pretty  well  understood  that  Losantiville  fell 
within  the  twenty  mile  limit,  no  lots  could  be  donated  or 
settled  upon  until  they  were  located  upon  the  ground. 

Part  of  the  assembly,  therefore,  remained  in  camp.  It 
would  seem  there  was  already  a block-house  on  the  spot, 
erected  by  some  previous  party  campaigning  against  the 
Indians.  Another  party  under  Messrs.  Denman  and  Lud- 
low proceeded  to  measure  the  courses  and  meanders  of  the 
Ohio  and  about  ten  miles  up  the  Great  Miami.  Another 
and  larger  party  of  armed  men,  under  Judge  Symmes,  Col. 
Patterson  and  Filson,  went  back  into  the  country  to  exam- 
ine the  interior  and  its  topography.  A number  of  the  Ken- 
tuckians, in  this  party,  for  some  reason  not  explained,  pos- 
sibly that  which  is  referred  to  by  Mr.  Perkins,  in  his  An- 
nals, pp.  307,  308,  and  by  Judge  Symmes  in  his  report 
May  18th,  1789,  hereinafter  mentioned,  turned  back  on  the 
second  or  third  day.  Whether  Filson  was  with  them  does 
not  appear,  though  Judge  Symmes  intimates  not,  but  in 
some  way  he  became  separated.  When  all  the  various  par- 
ties, after  a few  days,  reassembled  at  the  camp  opposite  the 
Licking,  Filson  was  missing;  and  though  reported  and 
always  since  understood  to  have  been  killed  by  an  Indian, 
I can  not  discover  that  any  one  saw  it,  or  that  his  body 


was  found  ; and  to  this  day  the  actual  fate  of  the  unfortun- 
ate man  is  a mystery. 

But  it  is  a mistake  to  suppose  that  Filson’s  loss  broke 
off  or  defeated  the  project.  It  became  necessary,  of  course, 
to  suspend  the  settlement  until  his  right  and  interest  in  the 
purchase  could  be  disposed  of  and  a surveyor  put  in  his 
place,  and,  fortunately,  the  right  man  was  at  hand.  Whether 
if  Filson  had  not  perished,  it  was  intended,  or  even  possible 
to  have  effected  the  laying  off  and  settlement  of  the  town, 
at  that  time,  seems  questionable.  The  surveys  and  compu- 
tations necessary  for  adjusting  the  townships  and  sections, 
and  thus  locating  the  lines  of  the  town  section  and  plat, 
with  its  streets  and  squares  and  lots,  could  hardly  have 
been  compjeted  at  once  : and  even  had  this  been  practica- 
ble, it  is  evident,  from  the  extended  time  given  for  settlers 
to  come  in  and  secure  the  donations  of  lots,  that  a settle- 
ment was  not  expected  to  follow  immediately. 

The  meeting  adjourned,  hut  “the  business”  was  not 
abandoned.  Messrs.  Denman  and  Patterson  went  to  Lime- 
stone, where  they  were  soon  after  joined  by  Messrs.  Symmes 
and  Ludlow.  Negotiations  took  place  by  which  the  brother 
of  Filson,  who  was  the  executor  of  his  will,  surrendered 
his  right,  and  Israel  Ludlow  became  the  purchaser,  and  by 
agreement  of  all  parties  took  Filson’s  place  as  one  of  the 
three  proprietors  of  the  town.  All  legal  arrangements  hav- 
ing been  satisfactorily  adjusted  for  going  on  to  complete 
and  lay  off’  the  town  according  to  the  original  agreement, 
and,  in  fact,  very  nearly  in  accordance  with  Filson’s  origi- 
nal plat,  Mr.  Denman  returned  to  New  Jersey,  leaving  full 
power  and  authority  to  his  two  associates  to  act,  Mr.  Lud- 
low being  his  special  agent,  in  perfecting  the  project  with 
the  public  as  first  proposed. 

During  the  months  of  October  and  November  Mr. 
Ludlow,  who  now  was  to  be  the  active  man  in  the  Losan- 
tiville  scheme,  revised  Filson’s  plat,  introducing  some 
changes,  but,  what  was  more  material,  he  had  ascertained 
the  precise  location  of  the  section  (and  fractional  section 
intervening  between  it  and  the  river)  which  the  proprietors 
of  the  town  were  entitled  to  have  under  the  purchase  from 


[ 10  ] 

Judge  Symmes;  and  by  which  the  east  line  of  the  section 
and  of  the  town  plat  became  fixed  where  the  intersection 
of  Broadway  and  Front  street  now  is ; Broadway  on  the 
plat  being  sixteen  feet  wide  and  called  Eastern  liow,  as  the 
oldest  inhabitants  will  remember. 

Thus  far  facts  and  dates,  notwithstanding  some  dis- 
crepancies here  and  there  in  the  authorities,  are  quite  clear. 
But  at  this  juncture  the  history  of  the  “ Settlement  ” runs 
into  a fog  of  contradictions  which,  as  Mr.  Perkins  tells  us, 
is  all  but  impenetrable;  and  we  shall  therefore  have  to 
move  with  great  caution  among  the  snags  which  surround 
us  in  our  exploration. 

We  have  the  authority  of  Judge  Symmes,  in  along 
letter  or  report  to  his  associates  in  New  Jersey*  written  at 
North  Bend,  May  18th,  1789,  that  “ on  the  24th  of  Decem- 
ber last/5  using  his  words,  “ Col.  Patterson,  of  Lexington, 
who  is  concerned  with  Mr.  Denman  in  the  section  at  the 
mouth  of  the  Licking  river,  sailed  from  Lirnestone  in  com- 
pany with  Mr.  Tuttle,  Capt.  Henry,  Mr.  Ludlow  and  about 
twelve  others,  in  order  to  form  a station  and  lay  out  a town 
opposite  Licking.” 

If  this  were  all  there  would  be  little  difficulty  in  as- 
suming that  this  party  may  have  reached  their  destination 
by  the  28th,  as  Mr.  McMillan  is  supposed  to  have  stated. — 
But  Judge  Symmes  proceeds  to  say, — “they  suffered  much 
from  the  inclemency  of  the  weather  and  floating  ice,  which 
filled  the  Ohio  from  shore  to  shore.  Perseverance,  how- 
ever, triumphed  over  difficulty  : they  landed  safe  on  a most 
delightful  high  bank  of  the  Ohio,  where  they  founded  the 
town  of  Losantiville, — which  populates  considerably.” 

But  when?  unhappily  the  Judge  omits  the  present 
desideratum  : not  disclosing  when  it  was  that  this  party 
landed  safe  from  this  perilous  and  evidently  protracted  pas- 
sage. The  compliment  which  he  pays  to  that  “delightful 
high  bank”  will  be  appreciated  from  the  fact  that  in  the 
meanwhile  the  great  flood  of  the  Ohio,  in  January,  1789, 
had  submerged  his  metropolis  at  the  mouth  of  the  Great 
Miami,  and  also  Major  Stites’  embryo  city  at  Columbia, 
whilst  Losantiville  had  proudly  stood  high  and  dry,  and 


[ 11 J 

thereby  gained  a,  prestige,  which  justly  entitled  it,  as  Judge 
Symmes  quaintly  said,  to  “ populate  considerably,”  and 
tended  most  materially  to  secure  its  triumph  over  its  rivals. 

Here  we  miss  the  pen  of  the  unfortunate  Filson,  who 
being  a ready  writer,  and  fond  occasionally  of  his  diary, 
would  never  have  missed  the  opportunity  for  a note  such 
as  this  occasion  afforded. 

So  far  as  yet  made  known,  the  only  direct  information 
which  we  have  as  to  the  time  of  the  arrival  of  this  party, 
is  the  testimony  taken  in  a chancery  suit,  which  arose  some 
fifteen  years  afterward  between  the  town  and  Mr.  Joel 
Williams,  concerning  “ the  common,”  or  what  is  now  called 
the  Public  Landing. 

The  town  plat  was  not  recorded  until  April,  1802. 
Mr.  Williams,  who  had  purchased  the  rights  of  Denman 
and  Patterson,  proposed  to  divide  the  Common  into  lots 
and  sell  them  : and  with  that  view  took  possession  and  pro- 
ceeded to  erect  buildings  and  fences  upon  a part  of  it. 
Mr.  Ludlow  resisted  this  and  put  upon  record  his  plat, 
founded  upon  Filson’s  plat,  showing  that  from  the  very  be- 
ginning the  Common  had  been  left  open  and  public  as  to  all 
the  space  from  Front  street  down  to  the  Ohio  river  between 
Broadway  and  Main  street. 

The  suit  for  an  injunction  against  Mr.  Williams  was 
brought  by  Judge  Burnet,  in  the  name  of  the  town.  To 
establish  the  fact  that  the  Common  had  been  dedicated  by 
the  proprietors  to  public  use,  the  depositions  of  all  three  of 
them,  and  of  six  others  of  the  earlier  settlers,  were  taken 
by  Judge  Burnet  himself,  as  stated  by  him  in  a subsequent 
document. 

William  McMillan  was  the  first  who  testified,  and  his 
statement  was  that  “ he  was  one  of  those  who  formed  the 
settlement  of  Cincinnati  on  the  28th  day  of  December, 
1788” 

The  testimony  of  Israel  Ludlow  was  taken  subsequent- 
ly. After  stating  his  purchase  of  one-third  of  the  town 
site,  he  said  that  “ in  the  month  of  January,  1789,  this  de- 
ponent together  with  Robert  Patterson,  Esq.,  who  was  also 
a proprietor,  etc.,  landed  on  said  ground  with  a number  of 


t 12  ] 

others  to  lay  out  the  town  of  Cincinnati  and  form  a settle- 
ment thereon.”  On  the  same  day  Col.  Patterson  made  his 
deposition,  agreeing  almost  literally  with  Mr.  Ludlow  in 
the  passage  above  quoted,  his  words  being  that  “ in  the 
month  of  January,  1789,  he,  together  with  Israel  Ludlow, 
who  was  also  a proprietor  of  one-third,  and  agent  of  Mat- 
thias Denman,  landed  on  the  ground  for  the  purpose  of 
laying  off  the  town  of  Cincinnati.”  Matthias  Denman,  in 
his  deposition,  stated  that  the  town  was  laid  out  in  1789, 
but  this  is  vague  and  merely  hearsay,  as  he  had  returned  to 
New  Jersey.  Ephraim  Kibby,  who  was  one  of  the  party, 
testified  that  “ sometime  in  the  year  1789  Israel  Ludlow 
and  Robert  Patterson,  with  many  others,  met  at  what  is 
now  called  Cincinnati,  for  the  purpose  of  settling  the  said 
town,”  and  he  adds,  “ then  called  Losantiville.  ” 

Without  presuming  to  express  an  opinion  as  to  the 
time  when  these  first  settlers  did  arrive  and  land  here,  yet 
upon  these  statements,  if  compared  by  the  rules  usually  ap- 
plied in  weighing  testimony,  the  28th  of  December  can  not 
be  confidently  or  even  satisfactorily  adopted  as  the  anni- 
versary of  that  event.  It  may  be  that  Mr.  McMillan’s  date 
is  right,  but,  as  the  matter  now  stands,  his  statement  can 
not  outweigh  the  joint  testimony  of  Messrs.  Patterson  and 
Ludlow.  Eor  whilst  they  state  clearly  and  unequivocally 
that  they  “landed  on  the  ground  in  January,  1789,”  Mr. 
McMillan’s  expression  that  he  was  one  of  those  “who 
formed  the  settlement  on  the  28th  of  December,  1788,”  is 
somewhat  ambiguous,  and  may  or  may  not  have  referred 
to  the  arrival  and  landing. 

Mr.  Cist  had  no  doubt  that  Mr.  McMillan  has  given  us 
the  proper  date,  for  the  reason  that  he  was  an  intelligent 
lawyer  and  magistrate,  and  a man  of  scrupulously  exact 
habits  of  business.  No  doubt  this  was  so,  but  as  to  intelli- 
gence and  accuracy  he  had  no  advantage  over  either  Pat- 
terson  or  Ludlow.  Mr.  Cist  further  remarks  that  Judge 
Burnet  had  assured  him  that  he  never  entertained  a doubt 
that  this  was  the  correct  date  ; but  evidently  there  was 
some  misunderstanding  here,  for  the  Judge,  in  his  “Notes 
on  the  Early  Settlement  of  the  North-western  Territory,” 


[ 13  J 

p.  46,  distinctly  states  that  this  party  “landed  on  the  north 
hank  of  the  Ohio,  opposite  the  month  of  Licking,  on  the 
24th  of  December,  1788.”  This  upsets  all  the  depositions. 

Having  thus  landed  you,  my  venerable  friends,  upon 
this  very  high,  though  not  delightful  bank,  I will  not  dis- 
tress you  further  with  the  .fatiguing  dispute,  but,  in  con- 
clusion, will,  venture  to  offer  the  following  suggestions  for 
your  consideration,  or  for  action,  if  any  appear  to  you  to 
be  proper  in  the  matter : 

First.  That  the  City  of  Cincinnati  should  justly  and 
gratefully  recognize  Matthias  Denman,  Robert  Patterson, 
John  Filson,  and  Israel  Ludlow,  as  its  founders. 

Second.  That  the  foundation  of  the  town,  proclaimed 
and  inaugurated  by  the  formal  meeting  held  here  for  that 
purpose,  on  the  22d  day  of  September,  1788,  and  never  for 
a moment  relinquished,  renders  that  anniversary  appro- 
priate for  celebration  as  the  original  institution  of  the  city. 

Third.  If,  however,  the  settlement  of  the  town,  instead 
of  its  foundation,  be  preferred  as  more  worthy  of  celebra- 
tion, that  the  Association  take  measures  for  obtaining  fur- 
ther evidence  on  the  subject,  by  causing  a thorough  search 
for  letters  or  other  documents  of  the  first  settlers,  among 
their  families  or  others  who  may  have  possession  or  knowl- 
edge of  any  such  evidence,  and  that  a committee  of  the 
Association  be  appointed  for  that  purpose. 

Upon  the  question  of  adopting  the  settlement  of  the 
town,  rather  than  its  first  formal  foundation,  as  most  worthy 
of  commemoration,  permit  me  to  add  a few  words. 

The  mere  landing  of  this  party  from  Limestone,  whether 
it  occurred  in  December,  1788,  or  January,  1789,  has  but  little 
significance  or  relevancy  to  the  main  consideration.  In 
other  words,  their  arrival  and  landing  was  merely  incidental 
to  the  previously  settled  plan,  and,  moreover,  by  no  means 
made  a “ settlement.”  This  is  best  proved  by  showing 
what  Cincinnati  really  was  a month  afterwards,  as  described 
in  an  interesting  little  sketch  by  Mrs.  Rebecca  Reeder,  ad- 
dressed by  her  to  this  Association  many  years  ago,  and  from 
which  I take  this  extract : 


[ 14  ] 

“ My  father,  mother,  and  seven  children  landed  at  Cincinnati, 
then  called  Lasantiville , on  the  8th  of  February,  1789.  The  first  per- 
sons we  saw  after  landing  were  Mr.  McMillan  and  Mr.  Israel  Ludlow, 
one  of  the  proprietors  of  the  place.  These  two  gentlemen  were  the 
surveyors  of  the  Miami  Purchase.  There  were  three  little  cabins  here 
when  we  landed,  where  the  surveyors  and  chain-carriers  lived.  They 
had  no  floors  in  their  cabins.  There  were  three  other  women  here  be- 
side my  mother.  Their  names  were  Miss  Dement,  Mrs.  Conney  Zenes 
(afterwards  married  to  Mr.  McMillan),  Mrs.  Pesthal,  a German  woman, 
and  my  mother,  Mrs.  Rebecca  Reeder.  There  were  but  two  families 
that  had  small  children : they  were  the  German  family  and  my  father’s 
family. 

“ Mr.  Ludlow  came  down  to  our  boat  and  invited  my  father  and 
family  up  to  stay  in  their  cabin’until  we  could  get  one  built;  but  my 
mother  thought  they  could  remain  more  comfortable  with  their  small 
children  in  their  boat.  So  we  lived  in  our  boat  until  the  ice  began  to 
run,  and  then  we  were  forced  to  contrive  some  other  way  to  live.  What 
few  men  there  were  here  got  together  and  knocked  our  boats  up  and 
built  us  a camp.  W e lived  in  our  camp  six  weeks.  Then  my  father  built 
us  a large  cabin,  which  was  the  first  cabin  large  enough  for  a family  to 
live  in.  We  took  the  boards  of  our  camp  and  made  floors  in  our 
house.  Father  intended  to  have  built  it  on  the  corner  of  Walnut  and 
Water  streets,  but  not  knowing  exactly  where  the  streets  were,  he  built 
our  house  right  in  the  middle  of  Water  street.  The  streets  were  laid 
out,  but  the  woods  were  so  very  thick,  and  the  streets  were  not  opened, 
so  it  was  impossible  to  tell  where  the  streets  would  be. 

“At  the  time  we  landed  here  the  army  was  stationed  at  North 
Bend.  The  army  was  in  a suffering  condition  from  the  want  of  bread. 
* * rppe  first  summer  after  we  came  here,  which  was  1789,  the  people 
suffered  very  much  for  want  of  bread,  and  as  for  meat,  they  had  none 
at  all,  only  just  as  they  killed  it  in  the  woods;  that  was  all  they  had 
to  eat. 

“ I will  close  by  saying  my  name,  which  was  Rebecca  Kennedy, 
daughter  of  Francis  Kennedy,  now  is  Rebecca  Reeder,  widow  of  Reuben 
Reeder.” 


The  following  extract  is  from  a letter  by  Thomas  Ir- 
win, of  Butler  county,  published  in  Cist’s  “ Miscellany,” 
Vol.  II.,  p.  22: 

“ When  I was  about  seventeen  years  of  age,  James  Burnes  and  I, 
from  Washington  county,  Pennsylvania,  landed  at  Cincinnati  between 
the  1st  and  I Oth  of  April,  1789,  and  remained  there  until  the  second 
week  in  June.  * * There  were  but  four  families  there  when  we 

landed  : Mr.  McHenry  and  his  family,  a largo  family,  two  sons  and 
two  daughters,  all  grown  ; Mr.  Kennedy  and  a small  (young)  family  ; 


[ 15  ] 


Mr.  Dement  and -a  small  family;  Mr.  Ross  and  a small  family.  Mr. 
McMillan,  John  Vance,  David  Logan,  Mr.  Reeves,  Hardesty,  Van  Eaton, 
and  McConnell,  all  lived  in  one  shahty,  being,  perhaps,  the  first  that 
was  put  up  in  the  place,  as  nearly  all  of  them  had  been  out  with  the 
surveyors  surveying  Symmes’  Purchase,  and  were  there  when  the  town 
was  laid  out,  and  all  had  lots  in  it.” 

These  reports  indicate  that  in  the  first  half  of  the  year 
1789,  there  was  very  little  settlement  here  to  boast  of ; and 
if  in  celebrating  the  first  settlement  we  would  pay  honor 
to  the  fact  rather  than  an  ideality,  I think  it  will  he  found, 
upon  investigation,  that  it  amounted  to  little  or  nothing 
until  the  occupation  of  this  point  as  a military  post  by 
Major  Doughty,  with  two  companies  of  United  States  troops 
under  Captains  Strong  and  Ferguson.  This  event  usually 
figures  in  the  annals  as  having  occurred  in  June,  1789,  but 
it  was  certainly  later.  By  an  extract  from  the  diary  of 
Major  Denny,  then  an  officer  at  Fort  Harmar  (Marietta),  it 
appears  that  Major  Doughty  left  that  post  on  the  11th  of 
August,  1789,  “ for  the  purpose  of  choosing  ground  and 
laying  out  a new  work  for  the  protection  of  persons  who 
have  settled  in  Judge  Symmes’  purchase.”  General  Har- 
mar, in  a letter  to  the  Secretary  of  War,  September  12, 
1789,  reports : 

“ Major  Doughty  informs  me  in  his  letter  dated  the  27th  ultimo, 
that  he  arrived  at  the  Little  Miami  on  the  16th,  and  after  reconnoiter- 
ing  for  three  days  from  thence  to  the  Big  Miami  for  an  eligible  situa- 
tion, whereon  to  erect  the  works  for  headquarters,  he  had  at  length  de- 
termined to  fix  upon  a spot  opposite  Licking  river,  which  he  represents 
as  high  and  healthy,  abounding  with  never-failing  springs,  etc.,  and 
the  most  proper  position  he  could  find  for  the  purpose.” 

This  settled  the  town  and  its  future.  The  ground 
chosen  was  the  tract  of  fifteen  acres  adjoining  the  town,  at 
the  East  End,  and  extending  from  Fourth  street  down  to 
the  Ohio  river.  Here  Fort  Washington  was  erected  in  the 
autumn  of  1789.  General  Harmar,  with  three  hundred  ad- 
ditional troops,  arrived  and  occupied  it  on  the  29th  of  De- 
cember. 

On  the  2d  of  January,  1790,  General  St.  Clair,  Gover- 


I 16  ] 

nor  of  the  Territory,  with  the  judges,  arrived  here  on  an 
official  visitation,  which  k.  ted  only  three  days.  During 
this  visit,  and  by  his  authority  and  order,  as  appears  from 
a letter  written  in  the  following  week  by  Symrnes,  he  being, 
as  already  mentioned,  one  of  the  judges,  the  County  of 
Hamilton  was  established,  and  the  county-seat  fixed  at  this 
town,  to  which  the  Governor  then  gave  the  name  of 
Cincinnati. 


APPENDIX. 


A Committee  of  the  Pioneer  Association  has  been  appointed  to  obtain 
further  information  as  to  the  date  of  the  settlement  of  Cincinnati,  They 
respectfully  request  the  co-operation  of  all  persons  who  may  have  it  in  their 
power  to  contribute  or  point  ( ii.t,<a.uy  means  of  information. 

The  list  of  the  first  settlers  of  the  town,  which  was  published  in  the 
Directory  of  1819,  contains  the  following  names,  besides  those  of  Messrs. 
Patterson  and  Ludlow. 


NOAH  BADGELY, 
SAMUEL  BLACKBURN, 
THADDEUS  BRUEN, 
ROBERT  CALDWELL, 
JAMES  CARPENTER, 
WILLIAM  CONNELL, 
MATTHIAS  FOWLER, 
THOMAS  GIZZELL,  V 
FRANCIS  HARDESTY, 
EPHRAIM  KIBBY, 

HENRY 


WILLIAM  McMILLAN, 
SAMUEL  MOONEY, 
JOHN  PORTER, 

EVAN  SHELBY, 
DANIEL  SHOEMAKER, 
JOSEPH  THORNTON, 
SCOTT  TRAVERS, 
JOHN  VANCE, 
SYLVESTER  WHITE, 
JOEL  WILLIAMS, 
LINDSEY. 


Cist’s  “Cincinnati  in  1859”  adds  the  names  of  Matthias  Campbell, 
Henry,  Luther  Kitchell,  Elijah  Martin,  and  Isaac  Tuttle. 

The  families  of  the  persons  above  named,  or  persons  acquainted  with 
any  of  them,  will  confer  a favor  by  communicating  to  John  D.  Caldwell, 
Esq.,  Secretary  of  the  Pioneer  Association,  Cincinnati,  concerning  any 
letters,  documents,  or  other  means  for  determining  the  time  when  the  party 
from  Limestone,  under  Messrs.  Patterson  and  Ludlow,  arrived  at  Cincinnati. 

Families  of  the  first  settlers  at  Columbia,  or  their  acquaintances,  may 
also  have  means  for  answering  thc'same  inquiry. 


